why do you vote FF/FG

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Agent Smith

Jack Sheehan wrote: »

Well, why I will vote for Fine Gael in the next election is I believe that they would do a good job of running the country. Simple as that.

pretty much this.

Breezer

I vote FG because I agree with their policies and think they have strong politicians who will actually implement them and not cave into every interest group: for example Reilly, Bruton, Varadkar, Hayes.

I believe Enda Kenny is an excellent leader and organiser (although his media performance is admittedly very hit and miss), he has done wonders for the party, and I agree with his 'captain of the team' approach. There's no point in having an entire cabinet of capable ministers if the orders are all coming from the top down.

FG is a centrist party which some people dismiss as 'standing for nothing' and having policies that change from day to day. I see it as a party not blinded by ideology, who will look at a situation objectively, taking into account current circumstances (financial, social, etc.), and form policies based on that. 'The truth does not change' is how churches are run, not how states should be run. You might say that FF take a similar approach, but the difference is that FF simply adopt the policies of whoever their junior coalition partner is, whereas I believe FG would do what is best for the country.

FF claim to be left wing and yet went into Government with the PDs 3 times in a row, supporting mass privatisation, co-location, etc. FG claim to be centrist and have diverse policies that reflect this, e.g. supporting competition for Dublin Bus while opposing co-location, proposing reform of a public service too full of pointless pen pushers while opposing cutbacks in our public health service such as the withdrawal of the cervical cancer vaccine.

Unlike FF, FG does not tolerate corruption.

My vote is not merely an anti-FF vote. To paraphrase Eamon Gilmore, we are not FF, but we are also not Labour, not the PDs, not the Greens and not Sinn Fein. We are FG.

zootroid

Breezer wrote: »

I vote FG because I agree with their policies and think they have strong politicians who will actually implement them and not cave into every interest group: for example Reilly, Bruton, Varadkar, Hayes.

I believe Enda Kenny is an excellent leader and organiser (although his media performance is admittedly very hit and miss), he has done wonders for the party, and I agree with his 'captain of the team' approach. There's no point in having an entire cabinet of capable ministers if the orders are all coming from the top down.

FG is a centrist party which some people dismiss as 'standing for nothing' and having policies that change from day to day. I see it as a party not blinded by ideology, who will look at a situation objectively, taking into account current circumstances (financial, social, etc.), and form policies based on that. 'The truth does not change' is how churches are run, not how states should be run. You might say that FF take a similar approach, but the difference is that FF simply adopt the policies of whoever their junior coalition partner is, whereas I believe FG would do what is best for the country.

FF claim to be left wing and yet went into Government with the PDs 3 times in a row, supporting mass privatisation, co-location, etc. FG claim to be centrist and have diverse policies that reflect this, e.g. supporting competition for Dublin Bus while opposing co-location, proposing reform of a public service too full of pointless pen pushers while opposing cutbacks in our public health service such as the withdrawal of the cervical cancer vaccine.

Unlike FF, FG does not tolerate corruption.

My vote is not merely an anti-FF vote. To paraphrase Eamon Gilmore, we are not FF, but we are also not Labour, not the PDs, not the Greens and not Sinn Fein. We are FG.

I agree with this more or less. I voted FG-Labour-Green in 2007, basically because I was fed up with the government wasting money. Also, I remember at the time people saying FG would make a mess of the economy, all the while the correct action wasn't being taken to avoid recession. The government were warned the construction industry was in a bubble, yet did nothing. Wages have gone through the roof over the last few years, how is any exporting company here to remain competitive? The ESRI were warning about this, the media were reporting this, yet nothing was done.

In 2002 I voted FF. I thought FG didn't have a clue what they were at. So I think credit where its due to Enda Kenny. Seems intelligent, and strikes me as someone who would put the country's interests first (unlike Bertie). He is god awful to listen to though. But what do people want, a charismatic chancer, or someone who's not the most interesting person in the world, but can look after the country's interests? I don't think Enda would make a great Taoiseach, but at least he'd be competent. Which puts him far higher than anyone in FF at the moment.

nesf

Breezer wrote: »

Unlike FF, FG does not tolerate corruption.

When FG have been in power for as long as FF have, you can say that. Otherwise it's just hurling from the ditch tbh.

leninbenjamin

voted Labour the last time, just to see Michael D in though. He's been kinda the conscience of the country for the last decade or so and frankly he's the only candidate in our constituency who's able to construct an opinion of their own and have a positive influence beyond just towing the party line.

Sadly for the next election though I won't have this option. All the other labour councillors who might run in D's place are quacks. Same for the Greens, nearly every independent and of course the Sinn Feiners. So I think next election it'll be one of the big two.

I really really really would like to have a reason vote FG, and probably still will, but it's only because they'll be the lesser of two evils; really haven't much faith in them to do a better job. Apart from Bruton, they all come across to me as really naive. Very few in there with the strength of personality, let alone know how, who you'd have faith in to get the job done.

bmaxi

T runner wrote: »

There was absolutely no choice in Sligo. It aither ended up 3-1 FF-FG if McSharry got his vote delegations right, or 2-2.
In the 80's Working class Sligo had a protest vote in the form of Flukey Gorman and his "All-night Party". That is until FF or FG but him out of business with the 2000 quid hurdle or 2000 votes last time or whatever it is.



A problem in Ireland may be that we still follow the old lines of the son following the profession of the father.

As long as there are blacksmiths So in a house where politics is discussed one of the children is interested enough or pushed a bit into taking it up, resulting in these dynasties. So when Daddy retires or dies the youngster steps in. I wonder what representation of the 12% women are daughters of former TDs? Its not good really.

This is changing a bit (children not always following parents) with the emergence of mass 3rd level attendance by the children of the huge middle class, but proportionally this "type" of traditional politician is too common.

I take your point but it still doesn't explain why people vote for them, especially in cases where the parent's, or siblings, or in some cases their own track record is less than admirable.

Breezer

nesf wrote: »

When FG have been in power for as long as FF have, you can say that. Otherwise it's just hurling from the ditch tbh.

I see where you're coming from, but I can't accept that really. Power corrupts, yes, but my point wasn't that no single FG politician would ever be corrupted (history would have proven me wrong in that case), but that the party as an entity would not stand for it. Honest politics is one of FG's core principles. Am I still hurling from the ditch? Maybe you'll say so, and fair enough, I can't prove otherwise, but I think the fact that you only took issue with one line in my fairly long post speaks for itself.

Frankie Lee

Fine Gael describes itself as a Christian-democratic party, with a focus on law and order, enterprise and reward, and fiscal rectitude

That is a right wing party in my eyes.

Frankie Lee

Also Enda Kenny along with Bertie Ahern have questions that will one day need to be answered over Shell.

Breezer

Frankie Lee wrote: »

That is a right wing party in my eyes.

That's Wikipedia's description of the party. FG's own definition:

http://www.finegael.ie//page.cfm/page/CorplacreidimhFineGael//pkey/1417 wrote:

Is Páirtí é Fine Gael don lár ionad forásach. Is é sin le rá go gníomhaimid ar bhealach atá feiliúnach do Éirinn, gan beann ar Dogma nó idé - eolaíocht. Bunaíonn Fine Gael a chuid polasaithe agus smaointe do thodhchaí na hÉireann ar a chorplár creidimh.

Why this information is only available in Irish, I have no idea, but it translates as:

Fine Gael is a party of the progressive centre. This means that we will act based on what is best for Ireland, rather than on dogma or ideology. Fine Gael bases its policies and ideas for the future of Ireland on our central beliefs

which it lists as: the chance of equality; enterprise and reward; safety; honesty; hope.

Yes, FG sits with the Christian Democratic parties in Europe, and if you had to push the party one way or the other along the axis, it would probably sit best at the centre-right position. But some of its policies are distinctly left of centre (universal healthcare, for example), and it is certainly not a right wing party.

T runner

bmaxi wrote: »

I take your point but it still doesn't explain why people vote for them, especially in cases where the parent's, or siblings, or in some cases their own track record is less than admirable.

I accept that, I think thats true. These are some reasons perhaps.

Lack of Choice: Because people in other non political profession families are following family professions themselves people are not getting as much of a choice especially within Political Parties.

Blind party loyalty:
I come from a FF voting family. I like to think I have my own mind politically now, but when there was a debate my immediate reaction was previously a powerful urge to defend the FF side.

This party support was ingrained in me I guess. Ive even defended the less than admirable track records myself. What happens is the person always has the premise that their PP is right and thus will always try and support/defend that position. By necessity the less than admirable traits are usually rationalised away in order to maintain the integrity of the initial premise (FF TDs good). Only when faced with overwhelming evidence will these bad traits be accepted, but then only in the individual rarely in the party. Sometimes the rationalising even turns to: the good the person does is greater than the
bad. You have to take the bad with the good sometimes, etc..

Anyway the point is these loyalties are very powerful. Viewed from the outside: voting for or even defending someone who is obviously dodgy may look irrational (because it is). However, the person themselves are blinded to these rational reasons by their loyalties.

I think this loyalty may be stronger in FF than FG.
I would find it very difficult to vote FG now because of this ingraining.

nesf

Breezer wrote: »

Maybe you'll say so, and fair enough, I can't prove otherwise, but I think the fact that you only took issue with one line in my fairly long post speaks for itself.

I took issue with more than one line of your post, I just didn't feel like arguing about every part of it. If I replied to everything I disagreed with on this forum I'd have to be around 24/7. Essentially power corrupts, and it's easy to stand against corruption when you've been out of power for over a decade. If FG can maintain their present stance after being in power for a decade, I'll be impressed.

bigstar

i cant agree with you nesf. if i accept bribes i cant say well you havent had the chance to accept them so you cant criticise me. on FF/FG, T runner voting for a party because its 'ingrained in you' is a very weak argument. Breezer at least you have some reasons but it sounds like you think FG are a better version of FF and would simply be better. thats not a strong argument either. They are two very similar parties, but because FF so willingly accept their coalitions policies they seem to just want power. the problem is there are not a lot of real alterntive. labour, who have been in the wilderness for a while, are a leftist party and FG are right so no coalition seems likely to work there. i dont think FF and Labour would work because their ideologies would not work together. Labour having one and FF not, or maybe that would work but why would we need FF at all if labour would set the agenda. i would lean in favour of a social democratic party, of which i think labour is closest but labour probably will never achieve a majority in ireland.

leincar

Nice and simplistic this one.

I've always voted FG because they are not FF. The only difference I've ever had is my second preference. I always went Labour(mainly because my Father was an active member) but in 2007 I went Green. Thats a mistake never to be repeated.

bigstar

you see thats the problem most of us dont seem to vote for a party we like just one we dont hate more than the other

leincar

bigstar wrote: »

you see thats the problem most of us dont seem to vote for a party we like just one we dont hate more than the other

Yeah i agree with you entirely. I'm of an age where I could vote for Garret Fitzgerald as he brought FG down a liberal path. At the moment there are very few parties that can be pidgeon holed. Except Sinn Fein and the Socialist party(Joe Higgins).

While I would disagree with the above parties on just about everything economically, you know where you stand with them.

nesf

bigstar wrote: »

i cant agree with you nesf. if i accept bribes i cant say well you havent had the chance to accept them so you cant criticise me.

You misunderstand my point, FF should very much be criticised for any corruption in its ranks. The problem I have is people claiming that their party would never have been prey to that corruption. I have serious doubts about that, corruption follows power and I find it hard to believe that there aren't people in the FG ranks who wouldn't give in to the temptation. If your party has been out of power for a long time, or since its inception in some cases, then it's pointless to say that they have been "cleaner" in that time. If you're not in power, why would anyone want to bribe you?

link8r

I just can't stand Captain Boring (Enda Kenny). I'd vote FF every time until there was no-one left to stand. FG has been made up of the most boring, unimaginative whingers.

I also believe there could be a lot better than FF - I'm be no means a FF member nor lifer. There is just no competition to them. I can't stand the Green Party, and the rest are just ... well FG-esque - pointless!

T runner

bigstar wrote: »

... T runner voting for a party because its 'ingrained in you' is a very weak argument....

Thats true, I'm not trying to argue for it. I dont vote like that any more myself.
The point I was making is that it can be a powerful influence on a lot of people. E.g one family voting for the same party through several generations etc.

I think FF voters find it very difficult to change to FG.

Enda Kenny gained some seats for FG last time, but not at expense of FF.
Labour could and should have hurt FF last time. FF supporters were willing to switch. The alliance with FG was a mistake as FF voters saw a defection to labour as helping FG get in power.
The alliance was good for FG as they consolidated, especially after Noonan flop.
If Labour had stayed out of the alliance and gone alone they would be in government now either with FF of FG.
They put themselves in a position where it was too difficult for willing FF voters to defect to them.

nesf

T runner wrote: »

I think FF voters find it very difficult to change to FG.

This I agree with, both sides of the FF/FG divide would find it harder to vote for the other side than to vote for any of the other parties. I know a few long term FF voters who are really pissed off with the way the Government is handling things and when I asked if they'd vote FG in the next election (it being very much a two horse race in their particular constituency) they told me they'd probably just not vote at all.

I can't really relate to it but for the generation past, it was quite a bitter divide between the two parties for many years in many areas of the country where Labour et al didn't have any real presence.

Breezer

nesf wrote: »

I took issue with more than one line of your post, I just didn't feel like arguing about every part of it.

Fair enough I guess.

Essentially power corrupts, and it's easy to stand against corruption when you've been out of power for over a decade.

It does, and like I said I don't expect for one minute that everyone in FG is and will always remain squeaky clean. But when a party goes out of its way to present itself as standing for honesty and standards in public office, it's unlikely that the party as a whole would tolerate corruption. It's not the fact that some TDs are corrupt that bothers me (although it'd be nice if they weren't), it's when there are no repercussions for the corruption when it's discovered.

bigstar wrote:

Breezer at least you have some reasons but it sounds like you think FG are a better version of FF and would simply be better. thats not a strong argument either.

Well, what would you consider a strong argument? There's no point in denying that they are both centrist parties. Now, I don't want a party with a strong ideological base being the largest in the country, because I believe that such a party can sometimes be blinded by that ideology (America under Bush, for example). My vote would therefore naturally go to either FF, FG, or some elements within Labour (which presents itself as a socialist party but in reality is also a broad church). I've highlighted some key differences between FF and FG that form part of the reason for my belief that FG are a superior choice to FF (who I do not believe are fit to run this country at the present time). As for Labour, depending on the candidate, I would be likely to give them a second preference. Since in my case the candidate is Gilmore, I more than likely will.

bigstar

id love to start a spoil your vote campaign, imagine if more people spoiled their vote than voted for a politician. to be honest if that happened i really dont think anyone would care too much they be busy congratulating themselves for getting elected. anyway from the looks of this thread not many have a good reason to vote or any reason at all to vote either FF/FG. i hope gilmore gets labour to become a viable alternative.

bigstar

to breezer: i dont think there is a strong argument for either, thats why i wanted to know why people chose one over the other. to be honest i see FG as a more worthy party. theres not many FF politicians i would like, i thought seamas brennan was a decent man. im surprised there hasnt been any real argument put forward from FF supporters.

Breezer

bigstar wrote: »

to breezer: i dont think there is a strong argument for either, thats why i wanted to know why people chose one over the other. to be honest i see FG as a more worthy party. theres not many FF politicians i would like, i thought seamas brennan was a decent man. im surprised there hasnt been any real argument put forward from FF supporters.

They don't have much to say these days. And fair enough if you don't agree with the arguments that have been put forward, a lot comes down to personal viewpoint. If everyone agreed then we might as well have a one party state.

ninty9er

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Frankie Lee wrote: »

I was told by a prominent member of Fianna Fail that there would be a FF Labour government which at the time a lot of Labour people would have agreed with it but apparantly Pat Rabbitte would not budge.

A Fianna Fáil/ Labour Coalition was what middle Ireland told me it wanted on the doorsteps, it is what I wanted and it is what the majority of the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party wanted, but the DL element of Labour wouldn't have any of it. The talks did take place.

nesf wrote: »

When FG have been in power for as long as FF have, you can say that. Otherwise it's just hurling from the ditch tbh.

+1

Breezer wrote: »

I see where you're coming from, but I can't accept that really. Power corrupts, yes, but my point wasn't that no single FG politician would ever be corrupted (history would have proven me wrong in that case), but that the party as an entity would not stand for it. Honest politics is one of FG's core principles. Am I still hurling from the ditch? Maybe you'll say so, and fair enough, I can't prove otherwise, but I think the fact that you only took issue with one line in my fairly long post speaks for itself.

If you pick Haughey as the starting point, there were numerous attempts to stop him. The Arms Crisis was the most triumphant time for the general membership of Fianna Fáil, with the Hillery speech highlighting party sentiment, the same could happen FG, that someone like that could come back and tar all their successors with the same brush.
Lowry was easy to get rid of somehow, I don't know, a serving member cabinet is difficult to get rid of without your coalition partner pulling out of the programme for government, but Bruton managed to pull it off. Considering Lowry was once Chair of the PP it would have been a difficult pill to swallow.

So no, the opportunity for power to corrupt is not beyond FG, nor is it beyond becoming embedded by a handful of people.

nesf wrote: »

This I agree with, both sides of the FF/FG divide would find it harder to vote for the other side than to vote for any of the other parties. I know a few long term FF voters who are really pissed off with the way the Government is handling things and when I asked if they'd vote FG in the next election (it being very much a two horse race in their particular constituency) they told me they'd probably just not vote at all.

I can't really relate to it but for the generation past, it was quite a bitter divide between the two parties for many years in many areas of the country where Labour et al didn't have any real presence.

My granparents voted FG all their lives until 2002 when they switched to FF 1st prefs, 1 because of a personal vote for a candidate, 2 because of the Irish "I'm alright jack" inherent attitude.

bigstar

you sound like a FF man/woman, why FF?

ninty9er

I'm a member.

You will have heard very few (though still there were some) people complaining of government waste for the last 15 years. Now everyone is turning on the government AFTER the fact.

Completely pointless.

Sorry for the long-windedness of the following droning:

Personally, me or anyone I know who has contacted a TD/councillor to have something looked into or arrange a meeting to help with forms has only ever gotten a response from FF representatives with ONE exception for an independent councillor.

Even though the FG parliamentary party is quite young, the efforts made by FG to appeal to me as a young voter fail miserably.

It's not that FF does much better, but it doesn't come across as disingenuous and try to be "down wiv the yoof".

I looked at a lot of what FG said before I became a memebr of FF and if I hadn't joined FF I would have joined Labour.

Looking at the last election, I used my own gut instinct. I knew neither party could fulfil the promises it was making, but I was glad the one I had to defend would realistically try to fulfil more of its promises.

I had a spa attack at Citywest during Bertie's Ard-Fheis speech where he announced tax cuts, which weren't then nor are they now viable for a country in our position. We are NOT the UK and their solutions are not the answer to all of our problems.

I was personally very happy with the aims of the budget, but have been bitterly disappointed by u-turns. I have personally made ministers aware of this. I can stand the O'Keeffe one as it's temporary until the end of the academic year.

I would like to see a move towards centralised major hospital services, which is currently happening with cancer, that provides the best care as opposed to the most convenient care. I have personal experience of my nanna spending weeks in St. Lukes away from home, but rather that than treatment from generalised less-experienced teams in Limerick.

I would like to see a move towards a welfare clampdown, and while it only applies to a not insignificant minority, I believe that there is waste in the welfar system by providing cash as opposed to food vouchers, clothes vouchers etc for the long term unemployed.

I believe in Ireland as a Nation and as a State, and in our ability to lead the world in areas of finance and innovation, however this is going to take decades to effect and I want to be part of the party that makes it happen. I don't believe FG as a right wing, EPP member will be that party.

Finally, public service reform is needed but there is NO PARTY willing to take it on now, when there is most opportunity.

Liam Byrne

ninty9er wrote: »

You will have heard very few (though still there were some) people complaining of government waste for the last 15 years. Now everyone is turning on the government AFTER the fact.

That's rubbish and you know it. A quick trawl-back through newspapers would list reams of pure waste like non-working e-Voting machines, Bertie Bowl costs, refurbishing unused offices, make-up costs for Bertie, etc, etc.

ninty9er wrote: »

Haughey ....... someone like that could come back and tar all their successors with the same brush.

VERY simplistic, ninty9er; Lawlor, Burke, Cooper-Flynn & Ahern weren't "tarred" by Haughey; they dug their own holes all by themselves....

RiverWilde

I'd rather take a bolt cutters to my testicles than vote FF - they are a shower of self serving 'so long as we're alright' bunch of thugs.

Riv